Persons with Complex Regional Pain Syndrome Renegotiate Social Roles and Intimacy: A Qualitative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Persons with complex regional pain syndrome often experience allodynia, where touch is painful. Allodynia is associated with poor prognosis, but the impacts on roles, activities, social relationships, and intimacy remain unclear. There is a need to examine intimacy in complex regional pain syndrome from a lived experience perspective. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of cognitive debriefing interview data from 44 persons with complex regional pain syndrome who completed a patient-reported questionnaire. Using interpretive description and thematic analysis, we analyzed items and responses addressing allodynia, relationships, and intimacy. RESULTS: Two themes were developed to understand intimacy related to the pain experience: a renegotiated social identity and participation and a reinvented intimate self. These themes included elements of a) loss of control, b) loss of shared experiences, c) feeling that their condition was misunderstood, d) a need for self-preservation, e) altered self-concept, and e) the concept of intimacy is broader than sexuality. Our findings suggest that complex regional pain syndrome has pervasive impacts on relationships and intimacy that merit discussion with their health care team. CONCLUSIONS: Persons with persistent pain need to be supported in roles and activities that allow them to express intimacy in their everyday lives.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".